United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Ocala Division
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 
R. LAMMENS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
appeals the administrative decision denying his applications
for Disability Insurance Benefits “DIB” and
Supplemental Security Income “SSI”. Upon a review
of the record, the memoranda, and the applicable law, I
recommend that the Commissioner's decision be
sake of convenience, the administrative history, which is not
in dispute, is copied from the Government's brief:
Plaintiff applied for Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) and
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) on February 18, 2013,
alleging disability beginning January 1, 2008 (Tr. 213-21,
233). The Commissioner denied the applications initially and
on reconsideration (Tr. 129-46, 148-65). After a hearing (Tr.
28-66), an administrative law judge (ALJ) found that
Plaintiff was not disabled (Tr. 11-27). The Appeals Council
denied Plaintiff's request for review of the ALJ's
decision (Tr. 1-7). The Commissioner's final decision is
now subject to judicial review. See 42 U.S.C. §§
(Doc. 21, p. 1).
time of the ALJ's decision, Plaintiff was 47 years of
age. (Tr. 233). Plaintiff has an eighth grade education, and
past relevant work as a foreman for a utility company, and as
a locator for a telecommunications company. (Tr. 62, 236,
239). Plaintiff alleged disability due to temporomandibular
joint disorder (TMJ), “cracked skull, ”
headaches, facial injuries, broken back, back pain, memory
loss, hip pain, depression, and neck pain. (Tr. 41-47, 237).
on a review of the record, the ALJ found that Plaintiff had
the following severe impairments: history of compression
fracture with degenerative disease of the lumbar spine,
scoliosis, cervical spondylosis, TMJ with history of facial
fracture, alcohol abuse, depression, anxiety, and headaches.
(Tr. 16). The ALJ found that Plaintiff had the residual
functional capacity (RFC) to perform less than the full range
of light work. The ALJ found:
[The claimant] can occasionally climb ramps/stairs, kneel,
crouch, crawl, stoop, and balance; never climb ladders,
ropes, or scaffolds; avoid concentrated exposure to hazards;
and have no more than moderate exposure to noise. He would be
limited to performing simple, routine, repetitive tasks;
could have no contact with the public; only occasional
contact with co-workers and supervisors; and he would be
limited to routine changes, which were non-production
upon this RFC, and considering the testimony of the
vocational expert, the ALJ found that Plaintiff is capable of
performing jobs that exist in significant numbers in the
national economy, such as mail sorter, parts cleaner, and
retail marker. (Tr. 23). Accordingly, the ALJ determined that
Plaintiff is not disabled. (Tr. 23).
Standard of Review
claimant is entitled to disability benefits when he or she is
unable to engage in any substantial gainful activity by
reason of any medically determinable physical or mental
impairment which can be expected to either result in death or
last for a continuous period of not less than twelve months.
42 U.S.C. §§416(i)(1), 423(d)(1)(A); 20 C.F.R.
Commissioner has established a five-step sequential analysis
for evaluating a claim of disability, which is by now
well-known and otherwise set forth in the ALJ's decision.
See 20 CFR §§ 404.1520(a), 416.920(a);
see also Doughty v. Apfel, 245 F.3d 1274, 1278 (11th
Cir. 2001). The claimant, of course, bears the burden of
persuasion through step four and, ...